Only valid for active forum users. Active means at least 30 postings within the last 30 days (no spam postings). This will automatically being checked at www.starbike.com shopping basket so make sure that you are logged in at the WW board!If there does not appear a WW discount position when you check out you do not have enough postings!

I'm planning purchase of a compact (110 BDC) Campagnolo chainset, and absolutely integral to this choice for me will be the ability to fit a 36T chainring. Campagnolo, in their idiocy, no longer make these, although up until now I have been confident that there are plenty of 3rd party alternatives available, e.g. TA Nerius, Stronglight CT2.

What the **** is that about?? What's different about 2011 UT? Is the above statement true, and if so, does it apply to other 3rd party 11sp compatible chainrings, such as Stronglight?

If Campag have changed the spec of ultratorque just to prevent other manufacturers making a product available to satisfy a demand that they refuse to address themselves, I SWEAR this will be the last straw and I will sell my record groupset and buy SRAM Red...

The chainring bolts, except the one in the crankarm, now screw directly into the inner chainring. No requirement for a nut now.It's lighter and stiffer. I believe Stronglight are bringing out compatible rings. I'm sure TA will follow suit.

I'd be interested to know how much lighter and how much stiffer it actually is. I'd also think it might work out more expensive if you strip a thread. What's cheaper, replacing a chainring or a chainring bolt?

5 8 5 wrote:The chainring bolts, except the one in the crankarm, now screw directly into the inner chainring. No requirement for a nut now.It's lighter and stiffer. I believe Stronglight are bringing out compatible rings. I'm sure TA will follow suit.

Thanks for the info. So it's not really the crankset that's incompatible, just inner chainring / chainring bolt combinations? Or are the holes on the spider a different diameter?

Good to know that the 3rd party companies are catching up quickly in any case.

stephen@fibre-lyte wrote:I'd be interested to know how much lighter and how much stiffer it actually is. I'd also think it might work out more expensive if you strip a thread. What's cheaper, replacing a chainring or a chainring bolt?

Yup, I must admit it sounds a bit like a load of marketing tosh to justify inverse standardisation just to try to get us to buy more stuff, or more of their stuff...

I have a theory that the reason it's so difficult to get 50/36 cranksets these days from the big 3 is that they know full well that it's the perfect universal setup, and that if more people cottoned on they would only be able to sell one product (i.e., "crankset") rather than two ("standard" and "compact").

PezTech wrote:.....

I've never been sure how to interpret that in forum replies... Are you saying I should have done my research before posting?

since campy doesn't make a BB30 crank set, i bought a SRAM Red BB30 crank, and used Stronglight CT2 130 BCD Campy compatible chain rings. you get over the fact that you aren't using a Campy crank quite quickly. besides, you can always use other high quality crank sets like the Cannondale SiSL, Rotor, FSA, etc.

r_mutt wrote:since campy doesn't make a BB30 crank set, i bought a SRAM Red BB30 crank, and used Stronglight CT2 130 BCD Campy compatible chain rings. you get over the fact that you aren't using a Campy crank quite quickly. besides, you can always use other high quality crank sets like the Cannondale SiSL, Rotor, FSA, etc.

I thought about doing something like this, one of the things that put me off being the campy BB30 press-fit cups that are loctited (loctitened?) into my BB shell. Also, the campy SR crank with the Ti spindle option (585g) plus the 30g cups is only actually about 10 or 15g heavier than the Cannondale SiSL + spindle, bearings etc (603g?). I also figured that if the campy crank works for Gilbert and Voeckler it must be stiff enough for me...

I'm guessing that this might be exactly what I'm after, although there seems to be absolutely no information anywhere about what the CT2 Type E is and how it differs from Type D. The picture above is actually of the type D, but for the outer ring they have a picture of the actual Type E - http://www.probikeshop.com/stronglight-7075-campagnolo-type-e-110mm-11s/66776.html Unfortunately that doesn't tell me whether the inner ones are tapped or not...

Yes the type D are a for pre 2011 chainsets. The 4 non crank bolt holes are visibly too big to be threaded for chainring bolts.It certainly makes sense that type E is for 2011 chainsets onwards. I have noticed that Stronglight are quite lax about updating their site.

I noticed that after the release of 11 speed, Campag compatible rings were listed in webshops but there was no mention of them on the site for quite a while. I thinks it's a similar case now.

It might be worth taking a punt and purchasing them. You can always send them back if you don't use them.

Moreover the screw that goes into crankarm on SR UT Ti has a weird "security" torx pattern, you can not unscrew it w/regular torx! What gives? Do they want us to get a $50 special wrench forthat one screw? What is the purpose, so nobody steals my chainring off the bike?

SL58 wrote:Moreover the screw that goes into crankarm on SR UT Ti has a weird "security" torx pattern, you can not unscrew it w/regular torx! What gives? Do they want us to get a $50 special wrench forthat one screw? What is the purpose, so nobody steals my chainring off the bike?

That "security" bolt is nothing more than a means to tell if it's been removed or not. It's just a plastic bit in the middle that breaks off with a pair of needle nose pliers or the like. Then you use the normal torx bit to remove it. Exactly why it's there I'm not sure. Maybe to deter people who don't know what they're doing from removing it, no idea.